It is an OPINION piece by a "journalist" who has a very open political and anti-AGW agenda and is so full of spin I could use it as a ceiling fan
Show me the original research - and don't link to Landsea's work like Townhall did because that was NOT research - and it seems that Townhall also cannot tell the difference
Well yes, I suppose it might. Now all you need is evidence to support your view. Which I keep asking for. And which you never provide.
So until you've got evidence, I (and anyone else with a lick of sense) will continue to accept the consensus view.
Like I said before, we can all agree on global warming and we can agree on man's involvement, what we cannot agree on is that all is doom or gloom or on long term predictions, or on the exact cause, or even on the amount of climate sensitivity.
The problem warmers have is that they have bought, hook line and sinker, into the doomsday scenarios and long term predictions.
[quote=Poor Debater;1060853240]Scientists are naturally conservative. As it happens, conservative predictions are being overwhelmed by reality. Like this one:
That sea-level graph has no references at all. Correct me if I'm wrong but, -4 cm is NEGATIVE water. Why does the sea level change start there?
Not all 'evidence' is real either.Quote:
Not all opinions are equally correct, because not all opinions are equally informed by evidence. I've got evidence behind my opinion, and you don't have evidence behind yours. Therefore, my opinion carries more weight. Not everything is true. Some people are just plain wrong.
The problem with that argument is that there is no such thing as a 'denier.'Quote:
The problem is, deniers don't care about the evidence, they only care about the politics.